The Magistrate must set forth the substance of the information in the order under Section 111 of Cr.P.C. to enable the person against whom the order is proposed to be issued to defend the allegation.

Petitioner is the counter-petitioner in M.C. No.620/2023 on the files of the Sub Divisional Magistrate Court, Fort Kochi. The said proceedings have been initiated under section 107 of the Code of Criminal Procedure, 1973 (for short 'Cr.P.C'). A preliminary order dated 25.01.2024 has been issued, which is produced as Annexure A under section 111 of Cr.P.C, directing the petitioner to show cause why he should not be ordered to execute a bond under section 107 Cr.P.C to keep peace for a period of one year. Petitioner challenges the aforesaid show cause notice pointing out that there is an inherent infirmity in the impugned order of the Sub Divisional Magistrate.

2. I have heard Adv.Breez M.S., appearing for the petitioner as well as Sri. Renjith T.R., the learned Public Prosecutor.

3. In Girish P. and Others v. State of Kerala and Another (2009 (4) KHC 929) it has been observed that section 111 Cr.P.C mandates that a Magistrate acting under section 107 Cr.P.C must of necessity set forth the substance of the information in the order under section 111 to enable the party against whom such an order is proposed to be issued to appear and show cause against the allegations. It was further held that unless such information is furnished to the person against whom the order is proposed to be issued, he cannot defend the allegation.

4. In the Full Bench decision in Moidu v. State of Kerala ( 1982 KLT 578 ), it was observed that the involvement in a criminal case by itself, is not a guide to initiate proceedings under section 107 and an imminent breach of peace warranting initiation of such a proceeding is what is required. The following observations from the aforesaid judgment are relevant “Regard being bad to the object of S.107 of the Code and particularly the fact that it is not intended as a punitive action but preventive even where punitive action is taken preventive action may be called for if the character of the information is such that the Magistrate would be justified in acting on such information. As a rule of prudence it may be said that information about events which are the subject matter of pending prosecutions may not by themselves be relied on by the Magistrate as information sufficient to warrant an order under S.107 of the Code. Ultimately it would be for the Magistrate to consider whether on an overall consideration of the facts available to him by way of information he could form the opinion that the person against whom he was proposing to take action under S.107 was likely to cause imminent breach of the peace or disturb the public tranquility.

5. Similarly in Bejoy K.V. v. State of Kerala and Another ( 2015 (5) KHC 507 ) this Court has observed that the order under section 111 Cr.P.C must reflect that the Magistrate has assessed the truth of the information received by him and there is an imminent need for taking action to preserve peace. It was also observed that without disclosing the substance of the information received, upon which the satisfaction was arrived at, cannot sustain the order in the eye of law.

6. A perusal of Annexure A order reveals that the substance of the information received by the Magistrate has not been clearly delineated in the order. Though there is reference to a criminal case and there are vague references to the counter-petitioner being involved in acts of violence causing a breach of public peace, there is nothing specific in the information that is recorded in the impugned order. It is evident that Annexure A order does not satisfy the requirements laid down in the various judgments of this Court including those in Moidu v. State of Kerala (supra) and other judgments referred earlier.

7. in view of the above, the preliminary order issued in m.c. no.620/2023 on the files of the sub divisional magistrate, fort kochi against the petitioner is bereft of any legal backing and is liable to be quashed. ordered accordingly. the crl.m.c is allowed as above.